When studying history, I always found it amusing that parallels could be drawn between epochs in the histories of different places. One of the most common parallels was the manner in which religion developed. There have always been priests or holy men, born to be (supposedly, of course) closer to God, and providing a gateway, of sorts, to the commoners, such that the light of heaven could reach unto them. As such individual priests in tribes evolved into established Churches or Temples and moved into some form of an organized religion, the practices were regularised, and the religion became a standard, a way of life that connected many people across a certain land area, binding them to practices; and those that did not follow those practices, faced some sort of penalty or penance.
Given these circumstances, the church/temple/mosque became more and more powerful, and the practices more and more rigid - to such an extent that the holy text upon which the religion was based needed to be interpreted only by the priesthood of that religion - it was often in a language not understood by anyone else. Soon, that language existed merely as a medium to express religious doctrine, and thus the common individual had no longer the right to access God, but merely the right to approach the priesthood. Such an approach often required the needy to pay large sums of money. Thus, in the name of organized religion, extortion began.
To make a prayer to higher authorities, you needed to hire a priest. For a funeral, you needed to hire a priest. To enter a new home, you needed to hire a new priest. You needed the blessing of the religion to start any new venture. And they would come and mutter something you wouldn't understand, rule you from books that you could not read or have access to, and speak in languages to each other which you could only hazard guesses at the meaning of.
And then, one of the constants in life happened - change.
In the case of Christianity, one man stuck a list of demands on the door of a German Church, translated the Bible, and became the founder of a new order - the Protestant Church. The Bible reached the people. Whether people read it or not, of course, is another matter altogether. The priesthood changed. It no longer had a stranglehold on religion. And today, we have more Protestants than Catholics. I think. In any case, Protestants have changed the way Christianity was. Now, Priest preach in the common language, and the Holy Bible is no longer some kind of strange mysterious entity.
In the case of Hinduism, there was the reformatory movement emerging from the Brahmo and Arya Samaj, making Hinduism and the texts more available to the public. And when the religion, earlier on, didn't change fast enough, new religions such as Jainism and Buddhism were born. Given all of this, we see that there is a pattern when one looks at the development of religions.
What does this have to do with the law? Some of you might already have drawn the conclusion I seek to put forth with this post - but I ought, for the sake of clarity and for those who haven't gotten it yet, put it forth again.
Consider the Law. A set of rules and practices that binds everyone within a particular geographical area. It has its own comprehensive tests that might as well be written in an alien language. To understand any of what has been said, one must hire a lawyer. To start any new venture, you have to hire a lawyer to ensure that all licenses, etc. are obtained. To obtain justice, you must hire a lawyer. To get something stolen back, you must often pay the lawyer more money that the object itself is worth.
The movement has not yet reformed, but it might, soon. It scares me to be here, interning, seeing companies send in these 'queries' which we answer and make them pay ludicrous amounts for. Perhaps my protest would be less vociferous if I had a share of the money I am thus earning for the firm I'm at, but it still shocks me to know how many tens and hundreds of thousands we get paid for answering inane questions about the import of olive oil, and restrictions thereof.
The Law binds everyone, and affects everyone. It is a leech, for it does not create anything new, but regulates all that seeks to do so. It is metaphysical, for it speaks of that which is real, but itself is merely a kind of thought, an overarching rule finding bearing due to the way in which certain things move.
I'm an atheist when it comes to religion already. My thoughts are swiftly turning towards being an unbeliever in the Law, also. And thus, anarchy seems to be an excellent way to lead life.
For those who think I might be overreacting, there is this mall that was sought to be built on Mehrauli - Gurgaon Road, halfway between New Delhi and Gurgaon. It was called 1, M.G. It was meant to house all forms of Fashion Houses and clothes for and of the rich and famous. It turned out they didn't have some sort of building permit, or they were building in the wrong zone, or something.
I was extremely happy when the building was demolished. It showed that the Law would not bow down to the actions of the powerful. It gave me a nice warm fuzzy feeling. And today, 6 years hence, the hulk of the building still stands - the matter is still being considered by the Courts.
The Law is a leech. And it likes to take it's time over its meals. We, the Law Students of this country, want our own share of blood. We must, however, beware the change that is probably just around the corner. For such is life, and such is the historical imperative of our time.
